Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..
Its also less volume bounce at the front in chop, plus rigidity (like corrugated steel)

Thats true.
My Exocet S3 doesnt have a recessed deck around the mast track, but does have a scooped out deck in front of that. Maybe that does reduce windage, the board is hard to get tail walking, but it is low rockered overall.
But there was some delamination of the rail, I reckon due to it flexing from a couple of catapults. Fixed with some foaming epoxy. The board is still relatively thick in the nose, which helped absorb impacts. If it had had a thin nose like some boards it might have split from top to bottom.

Select to expand quote

Mr Keen said..

mob dog said..
I still don't get recessed decks. You don't even stand in that section anyway 90% of the time, so why not just make the whole board that thickness, the mast base would still be the same height ie down that bit lower. I've said it before and I'll say it again " I smell marketing hype" when it comes to recessed decks.

You recently posted that 28 knots was top speed. In order to fly the fin and reduce drag lower mast base is required. Concave deck makes sense

All they need to do is make a recess around the mast track, and keep the rest of the deck flat. I saw a new board like that recently, maybe 2-3" of recess running all around the mast track. Then if the mast hits the board it is hitting a long flat section so the impact is spread out. My 2016 JP Magic Ride deck got hit plenty of times with the mast, a few very shallow dents from catapults but that was it, and I was a beginner a that time and hooked in for the first time, coming from an old Bic Nova that I got to plane but never hooked in on.

Select to expand quote

PhilUK said..

Mark _australia said..
Its also less volume bounce at the front in chop, plus rigidity (like corrugated steel)

Thats true.
My Exocet S3 doesnt have a recessed deck around the mast track, but does have a scooped out deck in front of that. Maybe that does reduce windage, the board is hard to get tail walking, but it is low rockered overall.
But there was some delamination of the rail, I reckon due to it flexing from a couple of catapults. Fixed with some foaming epoxy. The board is still relatively thick in the nose, which helped absorb impacts. If it had had a thin nose like some boards it might have split from top to bottom.

It is very hard to pinpoint the influence of one factor of board design, but a recessed deck is a kind of a no brainer.

The most apparent advantage, one that everybody can appreciate, is the reduced volume up front. Than there is the lowered mast, small difference. The increased rigidity of the board. Nobody can feel it but is there due to ... physics. And finally the biggest one: increased control. And here one could trust the results ... or not, if he/she (where are the she in these forum? Is it only us males quarrelling about nothing?) does not believe much in evidence. All I can say is that even at my recreational level the recent scooped up acquisitions, a Starboard Futura 71 and an AV Modena 60, are a marvel of control compared to previous generations slalom boards. The AV, in particular, is ridiculous when it comes to easiness.

What is against a scooped up deck? Nothing. The idea that somehow a scooped deck makes a board more fragile with respect to mast hits is a bit of a fantasy. It has been said a few times in this thread: the mast hits the rail of any board when you hit the rail with a mast. Don't hit the rail with a mast, it is bad for the rail of the board if you hit the board rail with the mast!

Select to expand quote

duzzi said..

PhilUK said..

Mark _australia said..
Its also less volume bounce at the front in chop, plus rigidity (like corrugated steel)

Thats true.
My Exocet S3 doesnt have a recessed deck around the mast track, but does have a scooped out deck in front of that. Maybe that does reduce windage, the board is hard to get tail walking, but it is low rockered overall.
But there was some delamination of the rail, I reckon due to it flexing from a couple of catapults. Fixed with some foaming epoxy. The board is still relatively thick in the nose, which helped absorb impacts. If it had had a thin nose like some boards it might have split from top to bottom.

It is very hard to pinpoint the influence of one factor of board design, but a recessed deck is a kind of a no brainer.

The most apparent advantage, one that everybody can appreciate, is the reduced volume up front. Than there is the lowered mast, small difference. The increased rigidity of the board. Nobody can feel it but is there due to ... physics. And finally the biggest one: increased control. And here one could trust the results ... or not, if he/she (where are the she in these forum? Is it only us males quarrelling about nothing?) does not believe much in evidence. All I can say is that even at my recreational level the recent scooped up acquisitions, a Starboard Futura 71 and an AV Modena 60, are a marvel of control compared to previous generations slalom boards. The AV, in particular, is ridiculous when it comes to easiness.

What is against a scooped up deck? Nothing. The idea that somehow a scooped deck makes a board more fragile with respect to mast hits is a bit of a fantasy. It has been said a few times in this thread: the mast hits the rail of any board when you hit the rail with a mast. Don't hit the rail with a mast, it is bad for the rail of the board if you hit the board rail with the mast!

You are missing the point, on the 2019 Goya Bolt 135 the mast hits the ridge running around the concave deck, not the rails. And if the sail is just laying on the water the mast will hit the ridge. So you are saying I can no longer let the sail sit flat on the water when the board is on the water and I am either sitting on the board or standing next to it!?, come on! Try not letting the mast mast hit the deck ridge when pushing the kit out into deeper water with 1-2+ foot waves and the wind blowing 15-25+ knots!

Putting a 3/4" shim in the sail mast base eliminated the problem on my Bolt 135, but no one told me that when I first got the board, only after I started seeing/feeling the dents did someone at my local shop mention that, and I did not buy it from them so a great shop, Sandy Point Progressive Sports in S. Daytona Beach, Florida, US.

Select to expand quote

Sandman1221 said..

duzzi said..

PhilUK said..

Mark _australia said..
Its also less volume bounce at the front in chop, plus rigidity (like corrugated steel)

Thats true.
My Exocet S3 doesnt have a recessed deck around the mast track, but does have a scooped out deck in front of that. Maybe that does reduce windage, the board is hard to get tail walking, but it is low rockered overall.
But there was some delamination of the rail, I reckon due to it flexing from a couple of catapults. Fixed with some foaming epoxy. The board is still relatively thick in the nose, which helped absorb impacts. If it had had a thin nose like some boards it might have split from top to bottom.

It is very hard to pinpoint the influence of one factor of board design, but a recessed deck is a kind of a no brainer.

The most apparent advantage, one that everybody can appreciate, is the reduced volume up front. Than there is the lowered mast, small difference. The increased rigidity of the board. Nobody can feel it but is there due to ... physics. And finally the biggest one: increased control. And here one could trust the results ... or not, if he/she (where are the she in these forum? Is it only us males quarrelling about nothing?) does not believe much in evidence. All I can say is that even at my recreational level the recent scooped up acquisitions, a Starboard Futura 71 and an AV Modena 60, are a marvel of control compared to previous generations slalom boards. The AV, in particular, is ridiculous when it comes to easiness.

What is against a scooped up deck? Nothing. The idea that somehow a scooped deck makes a board more fragile with respect to mast hits is a bit of a fantasy. It has been said a few times in this thread: the mast hits the rail of any board when you hit the rail with a mast. Don't hit the rail with a mast, it is bad for the rail of the board if you hit the board rail with the mast!

You are missing the point, on the 2019 Goya Bolt 135 the mast hits the ridge running around the concave deck, not the rails. And if the sail is just laying on the water the mast will hit the ridge. So you are saying I can no longer let the sail sit flat on the water when the board is on the water and I am either sitting on the board or standing next to it!?, come on!

No, I am just saying that any board can be damaged if you leave it in the water with the mast hitting somewhere. Rail, or deck, or ridge, or between the straps, the tail, the nose, they all can fail. There is nothing intrinsically weaker in a scooped up deck ...

I have to agree with Sandman . Do the experiment . Get two boards , one with domed or flat deck , the other with sunken mast track . Connect a mast extension and bend it sideways until it hits the rail . There will be an angle difference. Not much in a scooped deck but a lot in a board with high rails and sunken track . This angle has to have an effect on the vulnerability of the rail . How can this be disputed ? In the real world I don't think a scooped deck will make much difference but a sunken track with high rails , especially if climbing onto the board to uphaul , sitting on the board , letting the mast hit the rails and getting washed in shorebreak ???
On another note , why don't wave boards have sunken mast tracks ? Surely they can benefit from better control , more rigidity, less weight up front and no difference in strength ? Obviously I'm missing something and waveboards don't need these , "must have" , huge improvements .
I have popcorn , discuss

Select to expand quote

Imax1 said..
I have to agree with Sandman . Do the experiment . Get two boards , one with domed or flat deck , the other with sunken mast track . Connect a mast extension and bend it sideways until it hits the rail . There will be an angle difference. Not much in a scooped deck but a lot in a board with high rails and sunken track . This angle has to have an effect on the vulnerability of the rail . How can this be disputed ? In the real world I don't think a scooped deck will make much difference but a sunken track with high rails , especially if climbing onto the board to uphaul , sitting on the board , letting the mast hit the rails and getting washed in shorebreak ???
On another note , why don't wave boards have sunken mast tracks ? Surely they can benefit from better control , more rigidity, less weight up front and no difference in strength ? Obviously I'm missing something and waveboards don't need these , "must have" , huge improvements .
I have popcorn , discuss

It's a gimmick.

Select to expand quote

duzzi said..

PhilUK said..

Mark _australia said..
Its also less volume bounce at the front in chop, plus rigidity (like corrugated steel)

Thats true.
My Exocet S3 doesnt have a recessed deck around the mast track, but does have a scooped out deck in front of that. Maybe that does reduce windage, the board is hard to get tail walking, but it is low rockered overall.
But there was some delamination of the rail, I reckon due to it flexing from a couple of catapults. Fixed with some foaming epoxy. The board is still relatively thick in the nose, which helped absorb impacts. If it had had a thin nose like some boards it might have split from top to bottom.

It is very hard to pinpoint the influence of one factor of board design, but a recessed deck is a kind of a no brainer.

The most apparent advantage, one that everybody can appreciate, is the reduced volume up front. Than there is the lowered mast, small difference. The increased rigidity of the board. Nobody can feel it but is there due to ... physics. And finally the biggest one: increased control. And here one could trust the results ... or not, if he/she (where are the she in these forum? Is it only us males quarrelling about nothing?) does not believe much in evidence. All I can say is that even at my recreational level the recent scooped up acquisitions, a Starboard Futura 71 and an AV Modena 60, are a marvel of control compared to previous generations slalom boards. The AV, in particular, is ridiculous when it comes to easiness.

What is against a scooped up deck? Nothing. The idea that somehow a scooped deck makes a board more fragile with respect to mast hits is a bit of a fantasy. It has been said a few times in this thread: the mast hits the rail of any board when you hit the rail with a mast. Don't hit the rail with a mast, it is bad for the rail of the board if you hit the board rail with the mast!

I can't comment on control etc but as a 165cm high female a recessed deck finally allows me to run the boom more in the middle of the cutout.
With Severne sails ( OD/ Mach)on non recessed decks I've always had to run it at the bottom and in earlier days that would damage the zip.
Mine are mostly 2017 / 18 so I don't know if more recent ones vary.
I find their freeride sails have a lower cutout.

Select to expand quote

Imax1 said..
I have to agree with Sandman . Do the experiment . Get two boards , one with domed or flat deck , the other with sunken mast track . Connect a mast extension and bend it sideways until it hits the rail . There will be an angle difference. Not much in a scooped deck but a lot in a board with high rails and sunken track . This angle has to have an effect on the vulnerability of the rail . How can this be disputed ? In the real world I don't think a scooped deck will make much difference but a sunken track with high rails , especially if climbing onto the board to uphaul , sitting on the board , letting the mast hit the rails and getting washed in shorebreak ???
On another note , why don't wave boards have sunken mast tracks ? Surely they can benefit from better control , more rigidity, less weight up front and no difference in strength ? Obviously I'm missing something and waveboards don't need these , "must have" , huge improvements .
I have popcorn , discuss

Dogging out thru the break needs volume at front. You don't want a board 5" thick at the front strap too.
Flex is desirable in a waveboard to some degree

There's two already. A freeride - slalom is obviously very different.

Anyway repeat after me "I need and asymmetric..... I need an asymmetric...."

Select to expand quote

Shifu said..

Imax1 said..
I have to agree with Sandman . Do the experiment . Get two boards , one with domed or flat deck , the other with sunken mast track . Connect a mast extension and bend it sideways until it hits the rail . There will be an angle difference. Not much in a scooped deck but a lot in a board with high rails and sunken track . This angle has to have an effect on the vulnerability of the rail . How can this be disputed ? In the real world I don't think a scooped deck will make much difference but a sunken track with high rails , especially if climbing onto the board to uphaul , sitting on the board , letting the mast hit the rails and getting washed in shorebreak ???
On another note , why don't wave boards have sunken mast tracks ? Surely they can benefit from better control , more rigidity, less weight up front and no difference in strength ? Obviously I'm missing something and waveboards don't need these , "must have" , huge improvements .
I have popcorn , discuss

It's a gimmick.

In a couple years decks will be flat again for superior handling , strength , rigidity, user friendliness whilst saving the planet even more . Next , due to superior advancements in shaping concepts , our team can now design boards without the necessity of complex and heavy multi stage cutouts . Creating a smoother more laminar flow character derived from nature which will increase dynamics providing a unique riding experience resulting in better handling , improved speed and light weight whilst reducing our carbon footprint .

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..

Imax1 said..
I have to agree with Sandman . Do the experiment . Get two boards , one with domed or flat deck , the other with sunken mast track . Connect a mast extension and bend it sideways until it hits the rail . There will be an angle difference. Not much in a scooped deck but a lot in a board with high rails and sunken track . This angle has to have an effect on the vulnerability of the rail . How can this be disputed ? In the real world I don't think a scooped deck will make much difference but a sunken track with high rails , especially if climbing onto the board to uphaul , sitting on the board , letting the mast hit the rails and getting washed in shorebreak ???
On another note , why don't wave boards have sunken mast tracks ? Surely they can benefit from better control , more rigidity, less weight up front and no difference in strength ? Obviously I'm missing something and waveboards don't need these , "must have" , huge improvements .
I have popcorn , discuss

Dogging out thru the break needs volume at front. You don't want a board 5" thick at the front strap too.
Flex is desirable in a waveboard to some degree

There's two already. A freeride - slalom is obviously very different.

Anyway repeat after me "I need and asymmetric..... I need an asymmetric...."

Could an asymmetric wave board be built with a swap able cutout kind of system for both tacks ? Ooooooooh !

Select to expand quote

sboardcrazy said..

duzzi said..

PhilUK said..

Mark _australia said..
Its also less volume bounce at the front in chop, plus rigidity (like corrugated steel)

Thats true.
My Exocet S3 doesnt have a recessed deck around the mast track, but does have a scooped out deck in front of that. Maybe that does reduce windage, the board is hard to get tail walking, but it is low rockered overall.
But there was some delamination of the rail, I reckon due to it flexing from a couple of catapults. Fixed with some foaming epoxy. The board is still relatively thick in the nose, which helped absorb impacts. If it had had a thin nose like some boards it might have split from top to bottom.

It is very hard to pinpoint the influence of one factor of board design, but a recessed deck is a kind of a no brainer.

The most apparent advantage, one that everybody can appreciate, is the reduced volume up front. Than there is the lowered mast, small difference. The increased rigidity of the board. Nobody can feel it but is there due to ... physics. And finally the biggest one: increased control. And here one could trust the results ... or not, if he/she (where are the she in these forum? Is it only us males quarrelling about nothing?) does not believe much in evidence. All I can say is that even at my recreational level the recent scooped up acquisitions, a Starboard Futura 71 and an AV Modena 60, are a marvel of control compared to previous generations slalom boards. The AV, in particular, is ridiculous when it comes to easiness.

What is against a scooped up deck? Nothing. The idea that somehow a scooped deck makes a board more fragile with respect to mast hits is a bit of a fantasy. It has been said a few times in this thread: the mast hits the rail of any board when you hit the rail with a mast. Don't hit the rail with a mast, it is bad for the rail of the board if you hit the board rail with the mast!

I can't comment on control etc but as a 165cm high female a recessed deck finally allows me to run the boom more in the middle of the cutout.
With Severne sails ( OD/ Mach)on non recessed decks I've always had to run it at the bottom and in earlier days that would damage the zip.
Mine are mostly 2017 / 18 so I don't know if more recent ones vary.
I find their freeride sails have a lower cutout.

The flip side is I can't get the boom high enough, I was at the top of the cutout with the recess

Select to expand quote

Imax1 said..
...
On another note , why don't wave boards have sunken mast tracks ? Surely they can benefit from better control , more rigidity, less weight up front and no difference in strength ? Obviously I'm missing something and waveboards don't need these , "must have" , huge improvements .
I have popcorn , discuss

oh ... no no no, it does not work that way. You do not "discuss". You go out there, build a wave board with and without whatever you think will give an improvement and see what happens. No popcorns!

Scooped decks, by the way, have been a constant presence for at least fifteen years.

Select to expand quote

duzzi said..

Imax1 said..
...
On another note , why don't wave boards have sunken mast tracks ? Surely they can benefit from better control , more rigidity, less weight up front and no difference in strength ? Obviously I'm missing something and waveboards don't need these , "must have" , huge improvements .
I have popcorn , discuss

oh ... no no no, it does not work that way. You do not "discuss". You go out there, build a wave board with and without whatever you think will give an improvement and see what happens. No popcorns!

Scooped decks, by the way, have been a constant presence for at least fifteen years.

Which makes me wonder , exactly how much weight are you saving removing the superlight EPS form the scooped out deck ?

Its not less weight, its about less volume and lower CoG
But its about 5L so 65g on mine.

On a good day I can pick out of my nose 65g

Anyway I won't hear a bad word said about recessed decks or cutouts as I just spent time getting them both right haha

Select to expand quote

Sandman1221 said..

duzzi said..

PhilUK said..

Mark _australia said..
Its also less volume bounce at the front in chop, plus rigidity (like corrugated steel)

Thats true.
My Exocet S3 doesnt have a recessed deck around the mast track, but does have a scooped out deck in front of that. Maybe that does reduce windage, the board is hard to get tail walking, but it is low rockered overall.
But there was some delamination of the rail, I reckon due to it flexing from a couple of catapults. Fixed with some foaming epoxy. The board is still relatively thick in the nose, which helped absorb impacts. If it had had a thin nose like some boards it might have split from top to bottom.

It is very hard to pinpoint the influence of one factor of board design, but a recessed deck is a kind of a no brainer.

The most apparent advantage, one that everybody can appreciate, is the reduced volume up front. Than there is the lowered mast, small difference. The increased rigidity of the board. Nobody can feel it but is there due to ... physics. And finally the biggest one: increased control. And here one could trust the results ... or not, if he/she (where are the she in these forum? Is it only us males quarrelling about nothing?) does not believe much in evidence. All I can say is that even at my recreational level the recent scooped up acquisitions, a Starboard Futura 71 and an AV Modena 60, are a marvel of control compared to previous generations slalom boards. The AV, in particular, is ridiculous when it comes to easiness.

What is against a scooped up deck? Nothing. The idea that somehow a scooped deck makes a board more fragile with respect to mast hits is a bit of a fantasy. It has been said a few times in this thread: the mast hits the rail of any board when you hit the rail with a mast. Don't hit the rail with a mast, it is bad for the rail of the board if you hit the board rail with the mast!

You are missing the point, on the 2019 Goya Bolt 135 the mast hits the ridge running around the concave deck, not the rails. And if the sail is just laying on the water the mast will hit the ridge. So you are saying I can no longer let the sail sit flat on the water when the board is on the water and I am either sitting on the board or standing next to it!?, come on! Try not letting the mast mast hit the deck ridge when pushing the kit out into deeper water with 1-2+ foot waves and the wind blowing 15-25+ knots!

Putting a 3/4" shim in the sail mast base eliminated the problem on my Bolt 135, but no one told me that when I first got the board, only after I started seeing/feeling the dents did someone at my local shop mention that, and I did not buy it from them so a great shop, Sandy Point Progressive Sports in S. Daytona Beach, Florida, US.

Here's a tip. If your board's getting smashed because you spend a lot of time with your sail flat in the water, stop doing it so much.
In shallow water try lifting your sail rather than letting it smash your board to pieces.
On every windsurf board the mast will hit somewhere. On production boards these areas are usually reinforced. The shape of the deck makes bugger all difference.

I owned Mistral Slalom boards for 5 years, with no concave in the deck and have currently owned Fanatic Falcons for 2 years, with concave in the deck. There has been no noticeable damage to the deck adjacent the mast base on either brand. Both brands are constructed well and are in the heavier bracket of brand weight (> 7kg).

I would not expect there to be damage. The pivot point of the mast base is 50mm above the deck plate on my Chinook base and the recess in my Fanatic boards is only 20mm.

In my opinion, type of board construction has more influence on susceptibility to damage to the sides adjacent to the mast base than depth of recess of the mast base.

They don't design fast boards around the time they're sitting dead in the water. Thats what padded up beginner boards are for.

its not a life raft, you don't sit on it for a rest, you go to the beach for that. If you're uphauling a slalom/free race board on a regular basis, maybe consider whether you've bought the board that best suits your needs.

you can do whatever you want with the board you've paid for, but keep in mind its designed around doing what its made to do, not for what someone might do to it.

^^really good way to put it.

When I'm lying resting face down on my board I am starting to get dents from my harness hook, is this a design fault...

^^^ If you're like me its not the harness hook

Like I said, maybe it is called the Bolt Pro for a reason! But I think they could of designed a concave deck in such a way that when the mast did land or rest on the deck it made contact with a couple of inches of fairly flat deck, instead of hitting the top 1/4" of ridge.

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..
^^^ If you're like me its not the harness hook

The toy your laying on is NOT a blow up windsurfer

Select to expand quote

Sparky said..
When I'm lying resting face down on my board I am starting to get dents from my harness hook, is this a design fault...

Yes , it's the hooks fault . Should be made of soft rubber

Select to expand quote

Ben1973 said..

sboardcrazy said..

duzzi said..

PhilUK said..

Mark _australia said..
Its also less volume bounce at the front in chop, plus rigidity (like corrugated steel)

Thats true.
My Exocet S3 doesnt have a recessed deck around the mast track, but does have a scooped out deck in front of that. Maybe that does reduce windage, the board is hard to get tail walking, but it is low rockered overall.
But there was some delamination of the rail, I reckon due to it flexing from a couple of catapults. Fixed with some foaming epoxy. The board is still relatively thick in the nose, which helped absorb impacts. If it had had a thin nose like some boards it might have split from top to bottom.

It is very hard to pinpoint the influence of one factor of board design, but a recessed deck is a kind of a no brainer.

The most apparent advantage, one that everybody can appreciate, is the reduced volume up front. Than there is the lowered mast, small difference. The increased rigidity of the board. Nobody can feel it but is there due to ... physics. And finally the biggest one: increased control. And here one could trust the results ... or not, if he/she (where are the she in these forum? Is it only us males quarrelling about nothing?) does not believe much in evidence. All I can say is that even at my recreational level the recent scooped up acquisitions, a Starboard Futura 71 and an AV Modena 60, are a marvel of control compared to previous generations slalom boards. The AV, in particular, is ridiculous when it comes to easiness.

What is against a scooped up deck? Nothing. The idea that somehow a scooped deck makes a board more fragile with respect to mast hits is a bit of a fantasy. It has been said a few times in this thread: the mast hits the rail of any board when you hit the rail with a mast. Don't hit the rail with a mast, it is bad for the rail of the board if you hit the board rail with the mast!

I can't comment on control etc but as a 165cm high female a recessed deck finally allows me to run the boom more in the middle of the cutout.
With Severne sails ( OD/ Mach)on non recessed decks I've always had to run it at the bottom and in earlier days that would damage the zip.
Mine are mostly 2017 / 18 so I don't know if more recent ones vary.
I find their freeride sails have a lower cutout.

The flip side is I can't get the boom high enough, I was at the top of the cutout with the recess

It's a pain not being an 'average ' ( read what they design the boards for) person isn't it..

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..
Anyway I won't hear a bad word said about recessed decks or cutouts as I just spent time getting them both right haha

Best looking tail cutout I've seen

After thinking more about it, and all the comments about how a recessed deck improves the strength of the board, it may be difficult to design a board with a recessed deck designed to improve board strength and not have the mast hit the top of the deck ridge. So the simple solution is to shim the mast base up ~3/4" (depending on the board) so the mast contacts the deck past the ridge on a flatter section of the board between the ridge and rail. My Goya Bolt is remarkably light and stiff, and if it needs a concave deck with a ridge to achieve that then so be it!

Sadly there is no face palm emoji on this forum.
It doesn't matter what deck shape you have !!!! The point where the mast hits the board will always be an apex .
A straight line intersecting a curve is always going to be a single point.
Do they not teach geometry in the US ????